City Laws: Overriding State Laws?

The relationship between city, state, and federal laws in the United States is complex and often contentious. While city laws, or municipal ordinances, can address a wide range of issues and govern many aspects of daily life, the question of whether a city law can cancel out a state law is more nuanced. In general, a city law cannot directly override or cancel out a state law. However, there are scenarios where city laws can effectively make certain activities more restrictive or less of a priority for enforcement, even if they conflict with or deviate from state laws. This dynamic between city and state laws highlights the concept of preemption, where a higher level of government can use its authority to overrule or nullify laws at a lower level.

Can a City Law Cancel Out a State Law?

Federal preemption

Express preemption occurs when a federal statute explicitly states Congress's intention to preempt state law. For example, in English v. General Electric Co., the Supreme Court held that a federal law with an express pre-emption clause can preempt state law. However, the scope and substance of Congress's displacement of state law still need to be determined.

Conflict preemption occurs when a federal law directly conflicts with a state law. For instance, in Mutual Pharmaceutical Co. v. Bartlett, federal law prohibited generic drug manufacturers from altering FDA-approved labels, conflicting with state tort law that would have required the addition of information to the labels.

Field preemption occurs when Congress intends to occupy a specific legislative field, and state law is preempted even without a direct conflict. An example is the Voting Rights Act, which preempts state constitutions.

State preemption

In the United States, preemption is a legal doctrine that allows a higher level of government to restrict or prevent a lower-level government from self-regulating. State preemption specifically refers to the invalidation of an action by, or the removal of power from, a portion of the state government, usually by the state legislature.

In recent years, there has been an increase in state preemption, which has been criticised for being used to undermine healthy democracy and harm people, particularly BIPOC, LGBTQ+ people, women, immigrants, and workers. For example, in 2019, anti-sanctuary city and anti-immigrant bills were the most commonly introduced preemption bills, and more than half of US states have preempted local minimum wage laws.

Local government law

School districts may also have their own rules that apply specifically to their school systems. Additionally, there are special districts that function autonomously, providing services for a designated area. These special districts are recognised as separate entities from local or municipal governments by the Census Bureau.

While local governments have the power to create laws, their ordinances can be preempted by state law. Preemption occurs when a higher level of government uses its authority to overrule a lower level, meaning state law can supersede conflicting local ordinances. For example, in the case of Jennings v. City of Seaford, the court held that a city ordinance mandating the cremation or interment of fetal remains conflicted with the state's statutory scheme for the disposal of human remains, and thus, the ordinance was preempted and deemed invalid.

It is important to note that a city law cannot legalise what is illegal under state law, but it can make something illegal that state law allows, adding further restrictions. However, this does not mean that a city can pass a law that explicitly overrides a state or federal law. In practice, the enforcement of certain laws may be deprioritised by local authorities, creating a situation where certain activities are effectively tolerated, as is sometimes the case with marijuana in certain cities.

Municipal law

In some cases, courts may sever the conflicting language from a municipal law, allowing the rest of the law to remain valid, as long as it is still intelligible and conforms to the governing body's general intent. However, municipal laws can be held invalid if they are vague, arbitrary, unreasonable, or unconstitutional.

State and local government conflicts

State preemption is a legal concept that allows a state government to nullify a local law that conflicts with, or deviates from, state law. This is grounded in the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which asserts that federal law supersedes conflicting state law. However, it's important to note that a city law cannot cancel out or override a state law. While a city law can make something illegal that state law allows, it cannot make legal something that is illegal under state law. In other words, it can make things more restrictive but not less.

For example, in California, prior case law established a local government's flexibility in addressing gun control, upholding Morgan Hill's ordinance requiring the reporting of gun theft or loss within 48 hours. However, California state law requires reporting within 5 days, creating a preemption conflict. The court held that the city ordinance was preempted and invalid as it directly conflicted with state law.

Similarly, in December 2021, the city of Seaford, Delaware, enacted an ordinance mandating the cremation or interment of all fetal remains from abortions or miscarriages. The state attorney general challenged the ordinance, arguing that it conflicted with Delaware's statutory scheme for the disposal of human remains, which requires an official record of death before remains can be cremated or interred.

To manage these conflicts, some states allow local courts to handle certain types of disputes within their municipalities. Additionally, outside groups that favour more state or local control over policymaking, like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), engage in preemption debates to influence the balance of power between state and local governments.

Frequently asked questions